AMD Opteron 4376 HE vs Intel Core i3-9100HL Comparison

The Intel Core i3-9100HL and AMD Opteron 4376 HE occupy the same performance tier—their average benchmark scores are 1065 and 1061, respectively—but they achieve that parity through completely different strategies. The Opteron wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the data set, yet the i3 counters with superior efficiency, a newer process node, and integrated graphics. This is not a contest of raw speed; it is a contest of design philosophy, and the data shows a clear split between multi-threaded throughput and platform versatility.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Opteron 4376 HE wins outright in every benchmark where both processors were tested. Across five Cinebench tests—R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 singlecore, R23 multicore, and R23 singlecore—the Opteron holds a consistent advantage of roughly 15.7% to 15.8%. Its eight cores and eight threads, running at a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, deliver higher raw scores than the i3-9100HL’s four cores and four threads at 1.60 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost. In multi-threaded workloads, the Opteron’s core count advantage is decisive; in single-threaded tests, its higher clocks carry the day.

The Intel Core i3-9100HL wins in areas not captured by Cinebench scores. It offers a TDP of 25 watts versus the Opteron’s 65 watts, making it far more suitable for power-constrained or passively cooled systems. It includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, while the Opteron has no integrated graphics at all. It supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, whereas the Opteron is limited to DDR3. It also features ECC memory support, which the Opteron lacks in the data provided. For a user building a compact desktop, an embedded-style system, or any setup where the CPU must handle display output and keep power draw low, the i3 is the clear choice despite losing every benchmark comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-9100HL edges out the AMD Opteron 4376 HE, scoring 1065 versus 1061, a difference of just 0.4%.

Q: Does the AMD Opteron 4376 HE win any Cinebench tests?

A: Yes, it wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, with deltas ranging from -15.7% to -15.8% in favor of the Opteron.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The Opteron has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-9100HL has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Opteron also has higher base and boost clocks: 2.60 GHz and 3.60 GHz versus 1.60 GHz and 2.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core i3-9100HL supports ECC memory. The AMD Opteron 4376 HE does not, according to the data.

Q: Is there an integrated GPU on either chip?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-9100HL includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630). The AMD Opteron 4376 HE has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: How do their percentiles compare?

A: Both processors sit at the 29th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are statistically equivalent in overall standing despite the Opteron’s benchmark wins.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the AMD Opteron 4376 HE wins all five tests, and the margin is nearly identical across every workload. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Opteron scores 369 against the i3’s 311, a delta of -15.7%. The same percentage appears in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Opteron posts 1541 versus 1299. Single-core results follow the same pattern: R20 singlecore shows 217 for the Opteron and 183 for the i3, again a -15.7% delta. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 singlecore, where the Opteron scores 518 against 436, a -15.8% difference. The R23 multicore test yields 3670 for the Opteron and 3094 for the i3, keeping the -15.7% delta.

This consistency is notable. The Opteron’s advantage does not shrink in single-threaded tests, which suggests that its higher clock speeds (2.60 GHz base, 3.60 GHz boost) are sufficient to overcome any architectural efficiency the Intel chip might possess. The i3’s 14 nm process node and newer Coffee Lake architecture do not translate into a single benchmark victory. In every measured scenario, the Opteron is roughly 16% faster, regardless of thread count. The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story—1065 versus 1061—because the average includes data beyond these five head-to-head tests, but within the direct comparison, the Opteron is the clear performance leader.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The Intel Core i3-9100HL has 4 cores and 4 threads; the AMD Opteron 4376 HE has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 1.60 GHz for Intel and 2.60 GHz for AMD; boost clocks are 2.90 GHz and 3.60 GHz, respectively. TDP is 25 watts for the i3 and 65 watts for the Opteron. The i3 uses an Intel BGA 1440 socket, while the Opteron uses AMD Socket C32. Memory support differs: the i3 runs DDR4 in dual-channel mode with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Opteron runs DDR3 with no bus or bandwidth details provided. ECC memory is supported on the i3 but not on the Opteron. The i3 includes integrated UHD Graphics 630; the Opteron has none. PCIe support is listed for the i3 as Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Opteron has no PCIe data. The i3 has a launch MSRP of $225; the Opteron has no launch MSRP listed. The i3 is end-of-life, while the Opteron’s production status is not provided. Release dates are March 31, 2019 for the i3 and December 3, 2012 for the Opteron.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i3-9100HL is built on a 14 nm process node by Intel, with a die size of 126 mm². It uses the Coffee Lake architecture, part of the Core i3 generation (Coffee Lake Refresh). Its cache layout is 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. The AMD Opteron 4376 HE is built on a 32 nm process node, with a die size of 315 mm² and 1,200 million transistors. It uses the Piledriver architecture, codenamed Seoul, part of the Opteron 4000 series. Its cache is 384 KB L1, 8 MB L2, and 8 MB shared L3. The process node difference—14 nm versus 32 nm—explains the i3’s lower TDP and smaller die, while the Opteron’s larger die and older process allow for more cores and higher clocks. The i3’s cache hierarchy is per-core for L1 and L2, while the Opteron’s L1 and L2 appear to be aggregate figures. The Opteron’s L3 cache is larger in total (8 MB versus 6 MB), but the i3’s per-core L1 and L2 design provides dedicated resources for each of its four cores. Neither chip features a 3D V-Cache option in the data.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward recommendation based on workload. If the priority is raw Cinebench performance, the AMD Opteron 4376 HE is the winner. It outperforms the Intel Core i3-9100HL by approximately 15.7% across all five head-to-head tests, with its eight cores and higher clock speeds delivering consistent gains in both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. Its average benchmark score of 1061 is nearly identical to the i3’s 1065, but the direct comparison shows no scenario where the i3 pulls ahead.

However, the i3-9100HL wins on platform efficiency and versatility. Its 25-watt TDP is less than half the Opteron’s 65 watts, making it the only viable choice for low-power or fanless designs. It includes UHD Graphics 630, so no discrete GPU is required for basic display output. It supports DDR4 memory with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, a substantial upgrade over the Opteron’s DDR3 support. It also offers ECC memory, a feature missing from the Opteron in this data. For an embedded system, a compact desktop, or any build where power draw and integrated graphics matter more than peak multi-threaded throughput, the i3 is the better fit.

The Opteron targets a different niche: legacy server or workstation platforms where the Socket C32 interface, eight cores, and higher clocks are already established. Its lack of integrated graphics and higher power draw make it unsuitable for modern compact builds, but its benchmark dominance is undeniable. Choose the Opteron for maximum compute performance in a compatible server platform. Choose the i3 for a modern, efficient, and self-contained desktop solution. Both sit at the 29th percentile overall, but they serve opposite ends of the hardware spectrum.